Is it sexist to say Bush should "be a man" about things?

[OrlandoGator]

Per popular request, this first post from a General Discussion thread is being re-posted here. It was theorized that the responses to this question would contain less variance if it were presented to this forum.

Mods, not sure if this is a DU rules violation. If it is, my apologies.
___________________________________________________________________

I am involved in another nameless forum in which I recently posted something to the effect of, "Bush just needs to be a man and answer questions." A few women on the board found that line of rhetoric to be offensive and sexist...saying that his gender has nothing to do with his ability to tell the truth.

To an extent, I agree. But I think it sends a powerful image to shatter this fake macho persona that has been carefully crafted for this twit.

In my opinion, a "man" doesn't hide in his little castle while people gather outside his door to ask him questions. A "man" doesn't send kids to die for a cause he can't explain. A "man" doesn't talk with a fake accent in order to pretend he's from somewhere he's not. A "man" doesn't brag about his biggest failures in life.

I don't know...maybe it is sexist. I think this puke needs to butch up and be a man, for once in his pathetic existence.

[Kire]

1. be a "grown up" is more appropriate

yes, I'm more PC than you are

[Skittles]

2. I've never understood what it means

I particularly hate it when DUers - even female DUers, use the expression so-and-so HAS BALLS as if freaking male body parts are required for courage. TIRED, OUTDATED SEXIST CRAP

[beam me up scottie]

6. Thank you.

Playing along with the boys might be fun, but I'd rather be true to who I am than "get along".

[freeplessinseattle]

3. I know what you mean to express, but it looks as if

women do those things. think if it was a woman prez, would it be more understandable if she lied, and didn't have integrity and a backbone? it just sounds like women lack those qualities, and that he's acting like a woman now.

[TaleWgnDg]

4. Lookit. It's sexist. Period. Whether it comes from a male . . .

.
Lookit. It's sexist. Period. Whether it comes from a male or a female, it's sexist. It remains sexist.

As for the expression "politically correct," as another DUer stated, what the hell does that have to do with the price of tea in China? Politics, I mean. Nothing. When you slur an entire group of humanity, it's political? It's "P.C.?"

No!

Dammit, when will the left and moderates learn not to adopt their enemies language?



.

[beam me up scottie]

5. Ow

I'm glad to see you really wanted to know.
Your supporters may have been a little over the top, but you were pretty cool.

This is a thing with some of us who work in male dominated fields.
A lot of men from the old school use phrases like that to "remind" us of where we are.
On the other hand, a lot of guys from the new school are quicker to correct them than we are.

Also keep in mind that a few now ts'd disruptors used to pose questions like yours and then deny that sexism exists.
So some of us are a little suspicious about intent.
Sorry if I misjudged your intent.

peace

[omega minimo]

8. Beam, why play this game. Hasn't it been shown that the OP's attitude all

along was "people see words differently"?

It was another exercise in futility. Why bring it over here? I see no evidence of the sincerity we extended courtesy to last night. After having some fun with it, my attempt at a direct and clear answer (last time, I promise!) was met with more of the eternal:

"It's all about ME!" "Expanding on what you said!" "In one sentence!" "Without actually saying anything or RESPONDING to your comments!" "MEMEMEME look at me AREN'T I GREAT FOR ASKING YOUR OPINION I'M NOT REALLY INTERESTED IN?!"


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4431111&mesg_id=4431423

[beam me up scottie]

9. Sorry, my soft and weak feminine side wanted to make peace.

I thought perhaps the taste of crow would make enough of a lasting impression.

I really want to believe this isn't the next generation of the old meme:
"It's not sexism-it's classism. Sexism does not exist in the workplace because I've never seen it. Misogyny on DU? NEVER!"


Someone looking for more sock-puppets wouldn't repost in here.
That would be stupid.
The lounge, maybe.

[OrlandoGator]

10. beam me up scottie demanded like 10 times that I post it here.

You're making it seem like I'm playing some kind of flame-baiting game to find out how much hate I can spawn. Posting here certainly wasn't my idea, my intent was to present the question to all of DU in the General forum.

[omega minimo]

11. Please don’t waste y/our time

(this is your trip, Gator, not mine. I thought this was more about pointlessness than flame-bait: "You're making it seem like I'm playing some kind of flame-baiting game to find out how much hate I can spawn.")

I thank you again for the opportunity for discussion that you presented. It was an opportunity lost. What is the point if you were never interested in learning anything, but remain entrenched in your attitudes? Detached curiousity? Watching DU twist in the (breaking) wind?

After all that, the bottom line for you was: “Some think "grow up" and others think "don't be a woman." My context was the former, but I can see how it can be taken both ways.”

and: “People see words differently.”

and: “We've successfully established that it offends people. Okay. What more do you want me to do, repent?”

Your ambivalence is underwhelming. (For suspicious lurkers, that’s not “vicious”-- that’s :sarcasm:

Allow me to try one final (I promised B-)) clarification:

OrlandoGator:
“Man as opposed to boy. That's my point...I guess I could be gender-neutral and say "be an adult" but what I'm trying to do is knock him off the alpha-male high horse he doesn't belong on.”

-- The "alpha-male high horse” is still the standard you are measuring against.

OrlandoGator:
"I don't know...I don't see what is insulting about telling someone to "be a man" and take responsibility for their actions. It's not meant as an attack on women, by any means.”

-- “Be a man” is still the standard you are measuring against.

OrlandoGator:
“I'm not excluding women here or implying that there are different standards.”

-- The language excludes women from the standard that you set as the framework for assessing worth. Whether you acknowledge it or not, that is the answer to your question.

This sort of exclusionary language/attitude regards MALE as “normal” and “good” and FEMALE as “other” or “none-of-the-above” or NOT EVEN IN THE PICTURE.

That is why many women and cool men seek a more balanced, constructive way to communicate. That’s why DU Rules support this behavior based on respect.

There were actually some excellent comments on your thread.

beammeupscotty andswers your description of what a "man" doesn't do:
__________
“If a "man" does or doesn't do all of the above mentioned things, who does?

"In my opinion, a "man" doesn't hide in his little castle while people gather outside his door to ask him questions."

Does a woman?

"A "man" doesn't send kids to die for a cause he can't explain."

Does a woman?

"A "man" doesn't talk with a fake accent in order to pretend he's from somewhere he's not."

Does a woman?

"A "man" doesn't brag about his biggest failures in life."
Does a woman?

If not, what are the other choices?
___________

put out:
Well, I don't know from sexist (yes I do) but maybe
the "butch" term is a little rough. It's insulting to lots of people.
One could as easily say:

A woman doesn't hide in her house or at her work, nor cower in her car, when people ask her to be responsible for what she says and does, and then refuse to answer questions. A woman wouldn't send others' children into harm's way, while sheltering her own. A woman can explain why she does the things she does, and she can back her actions up with solid principle. A woman helps and protects all those who are weaker, poorer, younger, older, and those not able to otherwise care for themselves. A woman doesn't fake a thing about her real self. A woman admits her mistakes, and makes amends. A woman then strives to make those wrongs, right.
Maybe B*sh should be a woman about things.

rwenos:
"Be a Man"
Your problem, mate, is that a remark that is perfectly reasonable in a male-only environment (locker room, fishing trip) is not going to fly on DU. I know EXACTLY what you mean, because all men test other men by our own yardstick -- i.e., "being a man" in full. I know that you know that "being a man" has many definitions, ranging from pulling up a 100-mph serve to save a third set, to summoning up the nerve to repair a carburetor, to facing one's own shortcomings, to taking a young daughter out to a silly tea party. All of these are the things of "being a man."

However, this is not a locker room, fishing trip or similar. There are many female contributors to this forum, and I would not want to chase any of them off this forum. Your sentiment is precisely-drawn, but we all have an obligation to adapt our language to our audience.
Understanding our audience and adapting our language appropriately is, in this context, "being a man."

_________
Excellent additional comments from Eeyore and others there, as well. Thanks for an entertaining, if not enlightening, final go-round.


"People see words differently”

[beam me up scottie]

12. Excellent summation.

As usual.
:toast:

[omega minimo]

13. Fer ole time's sake

There were some excellent posts over there, yours not the least of which, and great input from men who are living in the Third Millennium.

:loveya:

[beam me up scottie]

14. It seems we have a new crop

of enablers in the movement.

I shudder to think of all who came before us and what they sacrificed for the freedom of these vapid, selfish little twits.

Nothing like using their stiletto heels to crush the memories of our long gone sisters.

feh

[omega minimo]

15. Strange

...as soon as being liberated meant exploiting yourself before someone else did, it became another aspect of the mindfucking world we live in......

Strangulating their own voices...gargling the rage away...........

:smoke:

[beam me up scottie]

16. Damn,

"as soon as being liberated meant exploiting yourself before someone else did"

I'm saving that one.

[Finder]

46. I do like that insight...

honestly, it is something to think about.

[beam me up scottie]

47. OM has a gift.

She nailed it with those words.

[lukasahero]

17. Excellent summation

I read these posts yesterday but was too frustrated with the conversation to try and jump in. Kudos and thanks to you, BMUS and others who fought the good fight. :hug:

OM, I may not understand you all the time (you go way over my head sometimes, I must admit) but this one I got. :) Thanks!

[omega minimo]

18. Thanks for everything LH

:toast:

[beam me up scottie]

19. No problem!

It reminded me of why I stay the hell away from GD.
There aren't enough swear words in the world...

[meg]

7. Yes it is sexist and so is 'butch up'

Your use of the term 'man' instead of the appropriate word 'adult' or 'mature adult' is sexist for the following reasons:

• The prototype for an adult is an adult male.


• The message to women is that it takes a man to be a 'real' adult


• Your 'powerful image' is that of a strong, mature male, perhaps a John-Wayne type. This image excludes and marginalizes women by the emphasis on male physical characterizes rather than emphasizing characteristics of a mature individual

Your 'butch up' comment just makes matters worse. Reread the above list.

[mongo]

20. Woohoo! Another phrase eliminated from the newspeak dictionary!

How empowering :woohoo:

A snippet from a recent speech by Bill Moyers. He was talking about the RW control of media, but I think the basic concept applies here:

This is always hard to do, but it has never been harder than today. Without a trace of irony, the powers-that-be have appropriated the newspeak vernacular of George Orwell’s 1984. They give us a program vowing “No Child Left Behind,” while cutting funds for educating disadvantaged kids. They give us legislation cheerily calling for “Clear Skies” and “Healthy Forests” that give us neither. And that’s just for starters.

In Orwell’s 1984, the character Syme, one of the writers of that totalitarian society’s dictionary, explains to the protagonist Winston, “Don’t you see that the whole aim of Newspeak is to narrow the range of thought? Has it ever occurred to you, Winston, that by the year 2050, at the very latest, not a single human being will be alive who could understand such a conversation as we are having now? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking — not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”

An unconscious people, an indoctrinated people, a people fed only on partisan information and opinion that confirm their own bias, a people made morbidly obese in mind and spirit by the junk food of propaganda, is less inclined to put up a fight, to ask questions and be skeptical. That kind of orthodoxy can kill a democracy — or worse.

http://current.org/pbpb/articles/moyers-may05-mediareformspeech.shtml

Yes, once you have removed all "sexist" phraseology from our language you will be free, no? All references to gender and sex must be removed for you to achieve equality.

I would like to propose that you also seek out phrases like "motherly love" - to be replaced with the "goals of a care-taker".

This is your freedom, your orthodoxy. To be unconscious of your own gender.

[omega minimo]

21. It's a concept, not the phrase, pornmongo

The OP invited a discussion by referring to another board where that phrase was criticized. The discussion was about the nature and effects of sexist language. IMHO the discussion was not limited to a single phrase.

"Yes, once you have removed all "sexist" phraseology from our language you will be free, no? All references to gender and sex must be removed for you to achieve equality."

Is there an official dictionary read by "Alpha males" up on their "high horse" that the rest of us don't know about. Some sacrocanct right of kings to say whatever-the-fuck-they-bloody-want-and-what-the-hell-are-you-lookin-at?

There's a lot of anger and frustration and Nazi-like shaved-head monster truck macho bullshit in the world today and I'll bet its hard for guys to deal with. To not feel threatened by the changes. Really, what is the big deal with respecting women?

"This is your freedom, your orthodoxy. To be unconscious of your own gender."

That may be what the miscomprehension comes down to for you. Interesting.

We are quite conscious. We are proud of our gender and the "radical notion that women are people."

If you compare the rights of women to be free of harrassment and equal participants in public affairs (including discussions on DU) to Newspeak, you really are determined to miss the point forever.

"This is your freedom, your orthodoxy. To be unconscious of your own" potential to contribute and cooperate with women.

:hi:

[mongo]

22. This thread is so about the phrase

and the inability of a few to understand the difference between actual demeaning speech and a common expression in our language.

If you compare the rights of women to be free of harassment and equal participants in public affairs (including discussions on DU) to Newspeak, you really are determined to miss the point forever.

How exactly does the phrase "be a man" harass you? If it does, should I be offended by the phrase "motherly love"? Does it imply that a mother's love is better than a father's? Do the terms "motherly love" and "fatherly love" convey different points? It's not me that's missing the point, it's you.

Is there an official dictionary read by "Alpha males" up on their "high horse" that the rest of us don't know about. Some sacrocanct right of kings to say whatever-the-fuck-they-bloody-want-and-what-the-hell-are-you-lookin-at?

There's a lot of anger and frustration and Nazi-like shaved-head monster truck macho bullshit in the world today and I'll bet its hard for guys to deal with. To not feel threatened by the changes. Really, what is the big deal with respecting women?

What a respectful point you make here. What is the deal with your andronist rhetoric? Personally, I have no problem respecting women. The person who is at the very top of my list for utmost respect at the moment is Cindy Sheehan.

Oh, and I contribute and cooperate with women all the time. They happen to make up roughly 50% of the population. I just don't cooperate with the ministry of truth.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mongo]

24. When you can't answer questions or make a point

call people names. Nice.

[omega minimo]

25. As I said, it's not clear why you bother

And do you expect those that you have previously abused, as you abuse the privilege of open discussion, to forget and want to engage with you? You want to fight. I don't.

:hi:

[Finder]

33. Who is abusing?

You are calling another poster names like "pornmongo" and "mongrel" which I would assume is not allowed.

[omega minimo]

36. Perhaps you haven't met

Mongo, this is Finder. Finder, Mongo.

[mongo]

38. Oh we've met

But I haven't seen her around in a while now.

:hi: finder

[omega minimo]

26. Although this comment was misinterpreted...

"There's a lot of anger and frustration and Nazi-like shaved-head monster truck macho bullshit in the world today and I'll bet its hard for guys to deal with. To not feel threatened by the changes."

Today I kept seeing these shaved pinhead business guys downtown at lunchtime and after work several megaton trucks flashed by. I'll bet it is hard for guys to deal with the deranged, psychotic macho-ness that is in the ads and in the WH; that drives Carl's Jr. and BushWar II.

Perhaps those who are open-minded and on the fence, potentially "cool" are intimidated by all the bogus imagery of how men are "supposed" to act now..... would make it harder to let the guard down and hear us without being threatened..........

as merh would say:

((((((((((( :hug: ))))))))))))

[beam me up scottie]

28. You got him started with that exploitation comment.

It's one of those trigger words, you know.
:evilgrin:

[omega minimo]

29. Yep, can't have the wimmins figgerin out

the ill logic of that one. "They're not exploited cuz it's THEIR CHOICE."

Bad for the bottom (of the barrel, bottom feeder) line.

:evilfrown:

[beam me up scottie]

27. Shocking. Another male who doesn't find sexist language offensive.

Thanks for airing Bubba's opinion, but we already know that many hetero white christian males don't have a problem using or defending slurs.

As a matter of fact, I think you guys invented most of them.

But your POV gets tiresome since I already hear it from the racist, sexist homophobes I work with every day.

[omega minimo]

30. ...so they're racist AND sexist.......

mebbe that means Bigotry is Bigotry.....

(I'll bet THEY could use a Newspeak dictionary :rofl: They problly think some pigs are more equal than others......)

[mongo]

31. Actually,

I do find sexist language offensive.

And I fully support all of your efforts to call posters on demeaning labels and language. I don't jump in and support a poster calling someone a bitch (or worse) for example. Yes, sexist language does exist on DU - it certainly exists in this thread, only the comments are generalizations about men.

The thing is there is a line where calling someone on sexist language ends and being an ideologue begins.

The assertion in this thread is that the phrase "be a man" is sexist - and that "be an adult" would be more appropriate. Those two phrases have different implications.

Saying "be a man" implies that Bush is a coward.
Saying "be an adult" implies that Bush is being irresponsible.

On some levels the phrase "be a man" is sexist. It ascribes certain characteristics to men such as bravely, honor, civility, etc. But it doesn't really imply that women can't posses those qualities. When you replace the phrase with "be an adult", it loses the meaning that the person wants to convey.

It certainly seems that to some of you, any mention of gender is offensive - even though it is ingrained into our language. And yes, most of these phrases are based on traditional gender roles and stereotypes - but that doesn't make them any less relevant or powerful or applicable.

Can you not see a difference in meaning between the two phrases "be a man" and "be an adult"? To get rid of the phrase "be a man" because it demeans women only serves to dilute our language.

If "be a man" is demeaning because it makes women less than men, then we had better get rid of the word mother too.

Do these two phrases have different meaning?

"motherly love"
"fatherly love"

Do they not evoke different imagery? Is one different than another? Is not motherly love more valued in our society? Should we also get rid of these phrases and replace them with "parental love"?

Omega minimo certainly uses language as if she see's value in using words that are sexist - "Alpha males", "sacrocanct right of kings", "Nazi-like shaved-head monster truck macho bullshit", "deranged, psychotic macho-ness", and to quote you "Bubba's". All of these are gender specific actual slurs that y'all see fit in flinging at me. Would these attacks have the same meaning if you could replace them all with gender-neutral phraseology? Or do they have value?

And I will bet that most of you reading this have used some female specific slurs in your lifetime to or directed at other females. These words have power. And yes, some words are so offensive that we shouldn't use them in polite conversation. But there is a line between keeping the conversation polite and being an ideologue begins, and a point where it just becomes Newspeak and only serves to dilute our language.

I hope that you will answer my questions, BMUS, and won't just resort to smug remarks and attacks as others often see fit to do.

[lukasahero]

32. If "be a man" = "don't be a coward", does

"woman" = "coward"?

Therein lies my problem with the phrase.

Weak, timid, needing protection, these are stereotypes that "be a man" brings up about what being the opposite (a woman) is.

Sorry but if you want the fiercest animal in the woods, you don't want the father bear, you want the mama bear. So regardless of whether or not the phrase is sexist, it's not actually all that accurate.

Let's put it in our accepted stereotypical gender terms - Bush isn't half the man Cindy Sheehan is. But you know what? Cindy's not a man. She's a woman. And she is braver, more courageous and less "cowardly" than shrub could ever hope to be. Shouldn't we be telling shrub then to "be a woman"? (When our stereotypes fail us, isn't it time to change them?)

[mongo]

35. I think you are kind of proving my point.

But first,

"If "be a man" = "don't be a coward", does "woman" = "coward"?

On some level, yes. But I think a more appropriate term for coward in our language, to use a sexist charged phrase would be "pussy" - right?

So, yeah I do see your problem with the phrase. But by trying to white-wash our langauge at some point does more to dilute and weaken statements (in this case the difference between "be a man" and "be an adult"), than to actually slur all women.

Sorry but if you want the fiercest animal in the woods, you don't want the father bear, you want the mama bear. So regardless of whether or not the phrase is sexist, it's not actually all that accurate.

I'll agree with you 100% on this, but it is still a phrase we use to evoke a certain image. So regarless of it's accuracy, "be a man" has a certain meaning in our society. Besides, we're talking about humans, not bears - but I wouldn't want to get between a mother and offspring of several species now that you mention it. I can remember being chased by a momma goose as a small child.

Let's put it in our accepted stereotypical gender terms - Bush isn't half the man Cindy Sheehan is. But you know what? Cindy's not a man. She's a woman. And she is braver, more courageous and less "cowardly" than shrub could ever hope to be. Shouldn't we be telling shrub then to "be a woman"?

And we do, although we call him a "pussy" instead. And I think the phrase "Bush isn't half the man Cindy Sheehan is" is a true statement - so at some level it becomes gender neutral, or maybe gender transendent. Do you think that if you said that to Cindy she would take it as a compliment?

(When our stereotypes fail us, isn't it time to change them?)

Are they failing us? What about the male slurs directed against me? Why would anyone trying to point out and change sexist language use them? Could it be the slurs are serving a purpose? That they have power and meaning that can not be conveyed in some gender neutral way?

Lukasahero, have you ever called another woman a bitch? If you said it did it demean you and all other women? Some women now self-describe as bitch, as an expression of power.

This whole debate parrallels the way the words nigga (a show of solidarity) and nigger (a personal attack) have been reclaimed by some african americans. Calling someone a nigger certainly coveys more meaning than asshole, bastard (if directed at a man of course), jerk (another word mostly directed at men), or whatever.

So there is sexist language based on stereotypes, outdated or otherwise. Some of this language is too strong to be used in polite conversation. But the fact is, we are two genders, and certain qualities and stereotypes are going to ascribed to each. There are certainly as many negative stereotypes and epithets directed at men as there are at women.

My point and wish is to look at where the line between repsonding to sexist slurs that should not be used in polite conversation, and words and phrases that convey a certain meaning - even if they are based in stereotypes, that really don't have a gender neutral equivalent.

I don't know where our language will be in 100 years, but I suspect that there will still be gender specific terminology in it. I don't think we can completely get away from it. I also think that sometimes negative speech has value too - and just as one african american calling another person who has wronged them a nigger doesn't demean a whole race, neither does telling Bush to "be a man" inherently demean all women - that was certainly not the intent of the original comment.

[lukasahero]

37. You are deliberately misrepresenting what I tried to say

but you've done that with me before so I shouldn't be surprised. However, I try not to litter my life with people who lie so I'm pretty much done here.

I will, however, answer your question have I ever used the word bitch. I used to. I don't any more. A strange thing happened - I listened, I learned, I changed, I grew.

[beam me up scottie]

39. Your last sentence is what we should all do.

All of us have used language that was derogatory to women or minorities.

Most of us never think about it until someone suggests that it's wrong.

Once someone tells you that it is offensive, you can do either of two things:

listen, learn, change and grow, as you have

or

you can cry about how PC the world is, how unfair that you are expected to be sensitive and then continue to use the offensive word and/or phrase except now you know that you are demeaning a group of people.

I assume that someone who wants to know if a phrase is sexist and offensive would want to know so that they could do the former.

[omega minimo]

41. Yeah, what she said.

That's the M.O. Why bother?

"But I think a more appropriate term for coward in our language, to use a sexist charged phrase would be "pussy" - right?"

"And we do, although we call him a "pussy" instead."

"Do you think that if you said that to Cindy she would take it as a compliment?"

"This whole debate parrallels the way the words nigga (a show of solidarity) and nigger (a personal attack) have been reclaimed by some african americans."

"Calling someone a nigger certainly coveys more meaning than asshole, bastard (if directed at a man of course), jerk (another word mostly directed at men), or whatever."

"My point and wish is to look at where the line between repsonding to sexist slurs that should not be used in polite conversation..."

Um, like using "pussy" and N-word" repeatedly in "polite" passive-aggressive conversation?

:yoiks: Riiiiiiiiiiiiight.

[mongo]

43. Hard to talk about language

without throwing a few terms around.

Sorry if I offended the (oh what did you call me?) defensively super-sensitive.

[omega minimo]

44. Didn't call YOU nuthin

So maybe it applies........

[beam me up scottie]

34. I am perfectly willing to listen to anyone's opinion.

But you, and many others on the original thread didn't just opine.
You editorialized about how foolish it was for women to think it was a sexist phrase.
Repukes use the words "Politically Correct" to describe efforts to eliminate racial, sexist and ethnic slurs.
I resent hearing them used here in defense of sexist language.

This is what it boils down to:

Many women and more than a few men agree that this is a sexist phrase.

Why should we have to justify our dislike of the language?

We explained how it's used and what it infers simply enough so that even a child could understand.

Shouldn't that be enough?

Would you continue to use racial slurs because many white and a few black people think that they're acceptable?

Then why would you justify using sexist language?

[omega minimo]

40. Be a Human

A mind is like a parachute. It only works when it’s open.

To correct the record:

1. The reference to “Alpha Males” up on their “high horse” came from the OP’s post in the original thread, which you might have noticed if you had read it; this was also referenced in my post to the OP on this thread. This is not a “gender specific slur.”

2. “Sacrocanct right of kings” -- although horridly misspelled, is not a “gender specific slur.”

3. "Nazi-like shaved-head monster truck macho bullshit", "deranged, psychotic macho-ness" were not “gender specific slurs” directed at males but DESCRIPTIVE IMPRESSIONS of an environment that males have to negotiate along with everyone else.

The CONTEXT was musing that such an environment must be challenging for males to deal with; plus the fact that it potentionally impacts these sorts of discussions on DU. The point (and the intention) was misinterpreted and I restated it --with clarification of the SYMAPTHETIC musing that I had been doing-- in a separate post above.

4. “All of these are gender specific actual slurs that y'all see fit in flinging at me.” None of these were “gender specific slurs.” And excuse me for pointing this out, but neither were these non-“gender specific slurs” DIRECTED AT YOU.

DU has shown me that trying to discuss with the terminally belligerent, deliberately manipulative and the defensively super-sensitive is truly pointless.

That's because I don't want to fight.

:smoke:

[mongo]

42. Context?

I thought I was the one always talking about context and intent in these discussions about "sexist" language. :rofl:

Bye now :hi:

[omega minimo]

45. M.O.

DU has shown me that trying to discuss with the terminally belligerent, deliberately manipulative and the defensively super-sensitive is truly pointless.